• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

some San Antonio apartment complexes refuse to rent to people with tattoos

Jump to latest Follow Reply
plum diamonds buckeye planet
Sort by date Sort by votes
iambrutus

iambrutus

Screw Blue
    • LINK

    Some San Antonio apartment complexes are refusing to rent to people with tattoos and body piercings. News 4 WOAI Trouble Shooter Jaie Avila investigates the case of one couple who says that policy is unfair.

    But last month, Carrillo's tattoos kept him and his wife, Melissa, from moving into an apartment complex called the Villas at Medical Center. "We liked the apartment, we brought them a check for the deposit and a check for the application fee," says Melissa.

    Later, Gilbert went by to look at the apartment wearing a short sleeve shirt. The next day, the Carrillos were told they didn't qualify to live there, because the tattoos on Gilbert's arms violated the policy on personal appearance.

    But we didn't give up. We contacted one of the owners of the apartments: A southern California doctor named Edward Frankel.
    Frankel e-mailed us a statement saying his apartment complexes do, in fact, "reject prospective tenants who have... tattoos exposed on the neck, head, hands and wrists, or large tattoos that cover over 40% of the lower or upper arm."

    Frankel says, "We do not discriminate. The above applies to persons of any race, color, gender, etc."

    Frankel, and his partners, have purchased numerous upscale apartment complexes in San Antonio and Dallas, where they've also banned pierced eyebrows and tongues. Tenants can't have more than one nose piercing, or more than five earrings.

    Local fair housing officials say the rules may be unusual, but they are not illegal. "Refusing to rent to somebody because they have tattoos may be unfair, but it's not discrimination under the fair housing act, unless the tattoos are specific to the person's religion or national origin," says Sandy Tamez of the San Antonio Fair Housing Council.
    Click to expand...
    Wow, thats pretty shitty!
     
    I have tattoos. I made the choice to get them, knowing full well they were, and are, unacceptable to "civilized society", especially professional society. When I am at work, I cover my tattoos. I keep my piercings small and unobtrusive. I knew, and know, that my decision to set myself apart with ink and steel would make it harder for me in some situations.

    Screw these whiners. No one is born with tattoos or piercings, its not like race or disability. These are modifications to one's appearance that we CHOOSE to do. If you make this kind of choice you had better be ready to face the known consequences. Like being denied an apartment in "civilized society."
     
    Upvote 0
    OCBuckWife;941189; said:
    I have tattoos. I made the choice to get them, knowing full well they were, and are, unacceptable to "civilized society", especially professional society. When I am at work, I cover my tattoos. I keep my piercings small and unobtrusive. I knew, and know, that my decision to set myself apart with ink and steel would make it harder for me in some situations.

    Screw these whiners. No one is born with tattoos or piercings, its not like race or disability. These are modifications to one's appearance that we CHOOSE to do. If you make this kind of choice you had better be ready to face the known consequences. Like being denied an apartment in "civilized society."
    Click to expand...


    while i agree that those are choices that the people made, i still feel that its discrimination against them. whats next, are they going to ban hair dye since that's not natural either?
     
    Upvote 0
    iambrutus;941195; said:
    while i agree that those are choices that the people made, i still feel that its discrimination against them. whats next, are they going to ban hair dye since that's not natural either?
    Click to expand...


    That too comes with the territory of choosing to alter one's appearance. If the owner of the apartment complex chooses to put forth a professional or upscale community feeling, he would not want to have large tattoos, heavy piercings and blue hair running around the complex. Old people and conservative people, business professional people, if these are his "target customer base" that appearance would scare them off.

    It's the same as applying for a job at a bank or a corporate office of any business. A "dress code" is applied and it's perfectly legal, it is not discrimination. If you are unable, or don't wish to, comply with the requirement, you don't apply for the job.

    The only problem I had, maybe, with this story, when I heard it yesterday was the question of "Did the office make the appearance requirements completely clear to the couple at the outset?" But that is an unknown unfortunately.
     
    Upvote 0
    iambrutus;941195; said:
    while i agree that those are choices that the people made, i still feel that its discrimination against them. whats next, are they going to ban hair dye since that's not natural either?
    Click to expand...
    Evidently it a personal appearance metric. Thus, I assume, no obese people need apply?
     
    Upvote 0
    iambrutus;941195; said:
    while i agree that those are choices that the people made, i still feel that its discrimination against them. whats next, are they going to ban hair dye since that's not natural either?
    Click to expand...

    Better phrased, it is discrimination, but it's not illegal or unlawful discrimination.
     
    Upvote 0
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top